ChuckBuck wrote:Knickoftime wrote:ChuckBuck wrote:Knickoftime wrote:ChuckBuck wrote:Knickoftime wrote:ChuckBuck wrote:Knickoftime wrote:ChuckBuck wrote:mreinman wrote:Knickoftime wrote:ChuckBuck wrote:Knickoftime wrote:ChuckBuck wrote:Knickoftime wrote:ChuckBuck wrote:Knickoftime wrote:ChuckBuck wrote:This thread should be locked as it'll mislead all the Knicks fans. The latest numbers are 4 years $72m. All years guaranteed. With Mozgov verbal with Lakers, Phil will be backed into corner and concede to Noah's reps.
Basically we're phucked for 4 years.
Try-olling too hard.
LOL Try-olling, hilarious stuff.
What specifically about 4 years guaranteed of declining Noah is a good thing for this franchise?
I'll comment when that's a real thing.
Ahh, the ole hedge against one's self. Never fails.
Nope, it appears Noah will sign. When he does and the terms are known, ask me if you're inclined.
i just said I would.
So humor me. If it happens to be 4 fully guaranteed years, what is your stance? Even at 3 guaranteed it's still a pure gamble.
I won't like that its 4 years.
It's a gamble at 1 year, I don't even need it to be 4 years to say that.
you won't like it or its a gamble is not really coming out and stating that you think we made a bad move, no?
I don't like it but I get it.
Its a gamble but thats part of the ...
Knickoftime finally said "gamble"!
And gambling is...boys and girls BAD.
So by transitive property, it's a bad PHUCKING move by Phil.
It's ok to be wrong, you know.
What's NOT a gamble in the NBA?
Signing James, Durant, etc to the max?
Those aren't gambles.
What else isn't?
Gambling on the 2017 draft and 2017 free agent class.
It's like shoving into the pot with pocket Aces against pocket Kings on a rainbow flop. It's the right play.
Rose, Gordon, Melo, KP, Noah is like holding 7-2 off suit and hoping to catch runner runner against pocket Queens. It's a bad bet.
You're a fan of a aggressive player who likes to play hands and not sit out. You're never going to change that.
And the draft is as big if not more a gamble than Noah. Least we know he can play.
The draft is a gamble, but next year less so than 2016. The 2017 promises to be of equal caliber or greater than the 2015 draft. Do a quick Google research and you'll see I'm right.
There's no Ben Simmons or Brandon Ingrams in next year's draft.
I'll pay you the courtesy to assume you're right that the long odds of next year's draft are a little less long than the long odds of this year's draft.
Doesn't change a thing I said.
It kinda does though. The chances of a lottery pick 1-14 of being a rotation player, starter, or potential all star are exponential compared tof the bottom half of the draft. There are always outliers, but win too much and you end up your Shumperts, your Hardaways, your Grants that are all inconsequential at the end of the day.
If we're going to gamble on the draft might as well get a blue chip prospect that can alter our franchise.
No, no.
Doesn't change the fact the Knicks weren't tanking. And not 10, 100, 1000 or 10k posts by you will ever change that.
Well, the eventual signing of Noah and Gordon guarantees this. Of which you admitted is a huge gamble. And relegates us to maybe .500 -.525 ball if they all play about 60-70% of the games.
Basically mediocrity and little flexibility when we could've had tons.
And of course you're okay with mediocrity.
So are you. You're a Knicks fan. You keep coming back for more.
And you just summed you and mreinman up. You ACTUALLY accept mediocrity every year. You line up for your "f--ing" (as he put it), but you think if you complain about your "f--ing" TOO, that this somehow makes you smarter.
'Yes I'm a Knicks fan, but I'M not happy about it."
And to you, this makes perfect sense.
Until you guys can wrap your heads around this contradiction...
